Getting rid of CD's?

[Speed Racer]

Just now, AnotherSpin said:

What about making rips and backups, is it legal?

 

Making backups for your own personal use is quite legal.

[AnotherSpin]

36 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Making backups for your own personal use is quite legal.

What if my wife listens rips while I am not at home? Or is it legal to listen copies with my friends together?

[astrotoy]

My understanding is that in the EU music copyrighted before November 1963 is in the public domain (unless recopyrighted). So one is free to rip a record from say 1959 which has not be recopyrighted and give or sell the rip.  Quite a few companies sell recordings which have been ripped from originals from that era.  The EU instituted that rule a few years back when the previous rule was 50 years for copyrights going into the public domain. Now in the EU, anything after November, 1963  has a 70 year copyright. I believe that was to essentially protect the copyright owner for their lifetime (projected as 70 years beyond the time of the copyright), but not forever.  The US rules are more complex, with different interpretations and different years.  I have read some arguments that say 1972 is the year, while other arguments (and lawsuits) claim different rules for different states.  So there are CD's which you can buy in Canada and Europe of historic performances in the public domain there which are not sold in the US because of copyright issues.

 

A not exact parallel is the copyright on books and publication, where books pass out of copyright and can be republished in the public domain.  For example there are many editions of great classic books from the time of Shakespeare and earlier, to more recent times which are low cost, out of copyright editions.  However, if they get modified, say a Shakespeare edition comes our with extensive notes and explanatory essays, then that edition can have its own copyright. 

 

I believe when Stravinsky was a young man, the copyright laws were looser, with different rules in different countries, and the time period was much shorter. So Stravinsky would take a piece that was going out of copyright and reorchestrate it, creating a piece which could have a new copyright.  Of course, if an orchestra wanted to perform the older version of the piece, they could, without owing anything for the performance. 

 

If one were to play a CD in public, say at a performance (or on the radio) then they were legally owe the copyright owner for that performance.  Of course, when you buy a CD to play at home, you have paid for the right to play it for your personal use, including having friends listen to the CD. Same with a DVD.  However, a movie theater cannot just play a DVD copy of a movie (even though they bought it) and charge people to see the movie, without paying the copyright owner.

 

BTW, I understand November, 1963 was not an arbitrary date, something to do with one of more popular groups and their second album. 

 

Larry 

 

 

[Speed Racer]

12 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

What if my wife listens rips while I am not at home? Or is it legal to listen copies with my friends together?

 

What if you wife listened to your CD while you not at home? It's the same as listening to your rips. Your friends can come over and listen to your music or watch a video anytime.

[AnotherSpin]

37 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

What if you wife listened to your CD while you not at home? It's the same as listening to your rips. Your friends can come over and listen to your music or watch a video anytime.

Then I may give rips from my CDs to anybody?

[Speed Racer]

27 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

Then I may give rips from my CDs to anybody?

 

How did you get to there from where we were?

[AnotherSpin]

If I can listen to rips with my friends why they can not listen the same rips without me? What if went to the bathroom or dozed? Should they stop immediately? Could I come with my rips to my friend house and listen together? What if went away for a minute (day, forever)?

[foodfiend]

Let's be clear about what are the legalities involved in this. I am sure that when they originally came up with the idea of selling recorded music, the music industry lobbied the IPO of countries to control the proliferation of copies, so as to make sure that the recording artist and record label get their just royalties. Even when CDs came out, there was no way for the general public to copy the contents without loss in quality at that point in time.

 

I am also sure that no one at that time could envisage that recorded music could then be reduced to a computer file, and could easily be copied without loss in quality.

 

That is why the laws in many countries only allow you the right to personal replay of the music from that particular media.

 

Fast forward to this current day and age, where FLACs and DSFs are being sold in addition to mp3s and AACs, many countries only allow you to own that particular copy of the file, and you are not even allowed to sell that file on to others if you get tired of it (unlike being able to sell a CD).

 

Let's get to the heart of why this is. The ability of being able to resell a CD, is based on the idea of unit of replay, that you theoretically lose the right to play the music on it once you on-sell that CD. Again, this is tied to the antiquated laws that did not have digital copies in mind.

 

Wherever you are, be aware of the copyright laws in the country that you are living in, since IP laws are governed by jurisdictions/countries, and don't run afoul with the laws.

[foodfiend]

3 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

If I can listen to rips with my friends why they can not listen the same rips without me? What if went to the bathroom or dozed? Should they stop immediately? Could I come with my rips to my friend house and listen together? What if went away for a minute (day, forever)?

If you go in accordance to the essence of the law, the licence is for personal replay/enjoyment, with or without friends. I am sure they are "allowed" to listen to the rips if you dozed off (you are still there in person), or went to bathroom (you are still in the same house/apartment).

 

It would also be alright if you brought your copy of the rip to your friend's house to listen together, but that rip does not get copied to your friend's media, but stays on your media (HDD, USB, etc). It would be similar to the instant if you brought a CD instead of the rip.

 

If you went away? Presumably then it no longer is possible for your friends to enjoy the music that you own. Since you are neither there in person, nor they at your house.

 

While this would be nearly impossible to police, this is the spirit of the laws that are in place.

[AnotherSpin]

48 minutes ago, foodfiend said:

If you go in accordance to the essence of the law, the licence is for personal replay/enjoyment, with or without friends. I am sure they are "allowed" to listen to the rips if you dozed off (you are still there in person), or went to bathroom (you are still in the same house/apartment).

 

It would also be alright if you brought your copy of the rip to your friend's house to listen together, but that rip does not get copied to your friend's media, but stays on your media (HDD, USB, etc). It would be similar to the instant if you brought a CD instead of the rip.

 

If you went away? Presumably then it no longer is possible for your friends to enjoy the music that you own. Since you are neither there in person, nor they at your house.

 

While this would be nearly impossible to police, this is the spirit of the laws that are in place.

 

I see you logic, still funny questions are coming. What if somebody drives my car and listens my CDs or digital files from the memory stick. Is it violation of law? What if a friend lives in a flat which I own and listens music without me?

[foodfiend]

Just now, AnotherSpin said:

 

I see you logic, still funny questions are coming. What if somebody drives my car and listens my CDs or digital files from the memory stick. Is it violation of law? What if a friend lives in a flat which I own and listens my music without me?

I think the answers are more obvious if you follow the essence of the law... Stop trying to split hairs...

[AnotherSpin]

3 minutes ago, foodfiend said:

I think the answers are more obvious if you follow the essence of the law... Stop trying to split hairs...

 

It is not a hairsplitting, just trying to help OP to find a way get rid from a piles of plastic and paper and feel himself law-abiding at the same time..)

[foodfiend]

8 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

It is not a hairsplitting, just trying to help OP to find a way get rid from a piles of plastic and paper and feel himself law-abiding at the same time..)

 

I think this was stated almost right from the start...

10 hours ago, Paul R said:

Hate to say it, but your license to play the music --> probably <-- depends upon your ownership of the physical CDs. Meaning if you keep the music on disk, you may be required to keep the discs too. 

 

If space is really of the concern, one can always get rid of the jewel-cases, and just store the discs and inserts.

[BigAlMc]

34 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

It is not a hairsplitting, just trying to help OP to find a way get rid from a piles of plastic and paper and feel himself law-abiding at the same time..)

 

Sorry but I respectfully disagree. There has been precious little trying to help the op here and instead people preferred to have a lengthy debate about the vagaries of copyright law 

 

The Op simply mentioned "getting rid" of the CDs to save space. One or two posts pointing out the copyright implications made selling them whilst keeping the rips was dubious would have sufficed. 

 

The laws around this stuff are flawed and often unenforceable. I personally feel that it comes down to acting with good intent. 

 

Buying a CD, ripping it, then returning the disc for a refund. Bad. 

 

Keeping the rips you paid for but disposing of the CDs in the trash or donating to charity etc. Fine. 

 

Regardless of the letter of law you paid for those CDs are entitled to the rips and it passes a reasonableness test to me. It's moot anyway because it's not as if Sony are going to turn up on the doorstep and demand to see the physical copies. 

 

All the other hypotheticals and flavours in between are a sideshow. I'm sure the op gets it and it's their personal choice how to proceed. 

 

I already opined that I'd keep them for sentimental reasons and potential future use (most likely to re-rip to the next latest/greatest format). But frankly I feel that I'm in the minority here for trying to actually address what the op asked. 

 

I'll let you get back to the bunfight 

[unbalanced output]

I have at least one practical question regarding this. The laws here are set to change next year, so I'm not throwing anything away just yet. However, I would like to keep what is left from my collection as compact as possible. Is there any good alternative for archiving that doesn't involve keeping the plastic CD cases? They look horrible after a few years anyways. 

 

I have opened my CD boxes a few months ago after many years of storage, and I'm sad to find out that many CDs are unreadable or missing  

[foodfiend]

3 minutes ago, unbalanced output said:

Is there any good alternative for archiving that doesn't involve keeping the plastic CD cases?

How about sleeves like these?They definitely save the space! If you are afraid about CD-rot or mould, place the sleeves in an air-sealed case with silica gel.

 

[unbalanced output]

I hate this stuff (used it for backups and the plastic stuff eventually leaves a mark on the CDs) and they don't keep the album art. 

 

Another practical question. When I buy music from some sites, all I get is an email with a download link that says I can download it 2-3 times and a thank you goodbye. I don't get a certificate or a register somewhere (with few exceptions like chaps from NativeDSD). Similar question for when I download a sample of an album - tomorrow they may not be given away for free anymore. How does one track all this? Many albums are still sold with physical copies (sometimes at no additional cost), but I just find it stupid to keep piling up stuff in the cellar that I will never use. I see the point of having to keep the physical copies as a "proof of ownership", however with the world of digital downloads things are not as clear anymore. How is this done outside the mainstram iTunes & co sites which I've never used anyhow?

[AnotherSpin]

1 hour ago, foodfiend said:

 

I think this was stated almost right from the start...

If space is really of the concern, one can always get rid of the jewel-cases, and just store the discs and inserts.

 

I believe there is some drastic difference between "get rid" and "store somewhere", but as my English is very far from being native I may tragically miss something important.

[AnotherSpin]

47 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

 

Keeping the rips you paid for but disposing of the CDs in the trash or donating to charity etc. Fine. 

 

Agree. 

[ted_b]

51 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

Sorry but I respectfully disagree. There has been precious little trying to help the op here and instead people preferred to have a lengthy debate about the vagaries of copyright law 

 

The Op simply mentioned "getting rid" of the CDs to save space.

OK, here is where I respectfully disagree with your post.  The OP was clearly starting a thread that had issues, and he even mentioned them by stating the idea was "philosophical".  He wasn't just wondering about the idea of 1200 cds in a trash container.

 

I think this subject is quite relevant to this forum, as it touches on ethics, morality, the various international laws, the music industry, and frankly, WTF are we to do with all these physical discs!  It's not like we want to break the law!  We all have them ripped (at least once).  Other than the childish rude comments of one or two posters, this discussion is worth having IMHO. 

[AnotherSpin]

4 minutes ago, ted_b said:

We all have them ripped (at least once). 

Do not leave your house, Sony will come in a minute or two.

[Jeremy Anderson]

11 hours ago, joelha said:

ditch the jewel cases and put the cd's into sleeves as I did. You'll save a ton of space and keep an archive of your music in case any of your files go bad . . . and believe me they can.

 

 

Agreed. You will be amazed at how quickly those CaseLogic (etc.) "books" of CDs disappear into your bookshelves. Or stay stacked in sturdy boxes in storage.  If you really want to divest yourself, recycle the liner booklets and the jewel cases... that way you can fit nearly twice as many CDs in the same volume. They compact rather nicely, those compact discs...

[BigAlMc]

10 minutes ago, ted_b said:

OK, here is where I respectfully disagree with your post.  The OP was clearly starting a thread that had issues, and he even mentioned them by stating the idea was "philosophical".  He wasn't just wondering about the idea of 1200 cds in a trash container.

Hi Ted, 

 

Firstly, I'd like to say that I  am a huge admirer of your work and posts. I have read many of your reviews and they have been influential in more than a couple purchase decisions. 

 

I agree that proving the provenance of digit ownership is an issue. Likewise selling CDs you intend to retain the rips of is morally dubious. And I agree that these are all very worthy debates. 

 

What I was in less agreement with was posts around if I have guests over and I leave the room/building then am I breaking the law. Firstly, jeez come on. Who is going to get sued for that. Secondly it's just not what the op was asking. 

 

The moral, legal, ethical stuff is definitely all valid and worthy of discussion. But so was the storage vs convenience vs nostalgia element and this side was neglected. 

 

Anyway perhaps I was too critical of the debate that did occur and if that's how it came across then that's my bad. 

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

[Audio_ELF]

Come on it’s a simple arithmetic ... 1 copy if a CD allows you one copy of the music.  It doesn’t allow you to distribute the music weather for profit or not.

 

What you choose to do yourself is between you and your conscience and the “copyright police” and courts should you get investigated, but don’t pretend that ripping and CD and then passing the CD on for others to listen to/rip is anything less than distributing copies of a CD.

 

Arguments around friends listening with and without you are just methods to justify copying CDs.

[AnotherSpin]

5 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

What I was in less agreement with was posts around if I have guests over and I leave the room/building then am I breaking the law. Firstly, jeez come on. Who is going to get sued for that. Secondly it's just not what the op was asking. 

 

As you hinting toward my post let me comment if you do not mind. I've been comfortable always with hypothesis which tells Western world not only appreciates, but welcomes the differences in IQ (small digits in my case). Not anymore?